[seek-kr-sms] GrOWL -metadata panel design.

Matt Jones jones at nceas.ucsb.edu
Wed Jun 30 10:09:06 PDT 2004


I think this is a good approach.  We definitely need to be able to 
import. I was just arguing that the ugly specifics of namespace syntax 
and terminology should be higgen from the user.  I like Ferdinando's 
suggestion to make it a simple label that changes as you browse to new 
namespaces.  In many ways this is a more readable version of the 
namespace prefix.  And I also agree that the actually underlying 
namespace URI needs to be settable because this is an editor, not just a 
browser.  However, its not clear to me that our scientists would ever 
choose reasonable namespace URIs, so we might consider whether they can 
be autogenerated as needed when creating new ontologies.  They are 
really just arbitrary IDs, and as long as they are unique URIs they 
should be fine.  Maybe we could strive to use LSIDs for the namespace 
URIs for consistency with the direction proposed in Edinburgh for SMS 
and EcoGrid?

Matt

Serguei Krivov wrote:
> OK, as I understand the idea is to give meaningful names to the base and
> other imported ontologies. Then let user see these names on the property
> pane (instead of current uri base). We would then specify real uri in
> some undercover dialog box , where we also establish their mapping to
> simple names. There will be some default mapping used during loading
> ontologies.
> 
> So we have #5: simple IDs for namespaces visible/ selectable in property
> panes + technical details and metadata in a popup dialog.
> 
> #5 is on the top!
> Any other bids!?
> 
> serguei
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------
> Serguei Krivov, Assist. Research Professor,
> Computer Science Dept. & Gund Inst. for Ecological Economics, 
> University of Vermont; 590 Main St. Burlington VT 05405
> phone: (802)-656-2978
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: seek-kr-sms-admin at ecoinformatics.org
> [mailto:seek-kr-sms-admin at ecoinformatics.org] On Behalf Of Ferdinando
> Villa
> Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 11:28 AM
> To: Serguei Krivov
> Cc: 'Matt Jones'; 'Shawn Bowers'; seek-kr-sms at ecoinformatics.org
> Subject: RE: [seek-kr-sms] GrOWL -metadata panel design.
> 
> Please DO support imported ontologies. They're necessary to grasp the
> meaning of what you're looking at. We don't want to be bound to creating
> ontologies that only embody a fully self-consistent concept space.
> 
> And speaking of this, what about some non-tech terminology to clarify
> things for the user? In the IMA I call "concept space" the namespace id.
> We can find a better name, but if we had a little status bar with the
> current "Concept space: xxxx" name always highlighted, changing as you
> switch to imported ontologies, and we make sure that the namespace id
> means something coherent and understandable, I think it would make sense
> to the user - certainly better than saying "namespace" anywhere. It's a
> syntax vs. semantics issue. Of course the URI would be in a normally
> hidden info pane or dialog as Serguei suggests.  And of course I would
> definitely hide stuff belonging to core namespaces such as rdfs or owl
> (we could configure these in).
> 
> ferdinando
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 11:08, Serguei Krivov wrote:
> 
>>So I would add #4: 
>>#4: No namespaces exposed in GUI whatsoever
>>Matt
>>
>>
>>Apparently, we have two different questions:
>> 1. About exposing namespaces of say classes and relations during
>>browsing and editing. We may hide them ,which would work fine when
> 
> there
> 
>>is no any imported ontology. If there is an imported ontology then one
>>maight like to know from where definitions came. But certainly,
> 
> looking
> 
>>at the long URI may frighten anyone, including myself. 
>>If we decide that at this point we do not support imported ontologies
>>then #4 is just fine. If we want import, then the question is- how we
>>can specify node namespaces without messing up with repugnant URIs?
>>
>>2. About specifying global namespaces which go to the heading of
>>ontology specification. There are many standard namespaces that could
> 
> be
> 
>>generated automatically, such as:
>>xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
>>xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
>>xmlns:owl=http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
>>
>>But how about specifying the base namespace, such as :
>>xml:base="http://wow.sfsu.edu/ontology/rich/Resources.owl"
>>
>>We should also provide some metadata which probably can be in one
> 
> place
> 
>>with base namespace. If we would like to avoid seeing these
>>technicalities all the time, then perhaps tab pane (#3) is not right
>>thing. Then should it be done in a dialog which pops up before user
>>saves ontology, or separate popup dialog, or something else? 
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Serguei
>>
>>
>>
>>Shawn Bowers wrote:
>>
>>>I am not entirely sure what you are asking. If you could craft up
> 
> some
> 
>>>screen shots of what you are thinking that would really help.
>>>
>>>My general opinion is that namespace names are useful (if people 
>>>organize ontologies around these), namespaces (as URIs) for people
> 
> to 
> 
>>>view are not and shouldn't be integrated into the graphical
> 
> interface.
> 
>>>If someone really wants to see them, then I would suggest using a 
>>>different window (for "expert" mode) that lists namespace names and 
>>>their corresponding URI.
>>>
>>>Also, how do you see people using namespaces in your editor? How are
>>
>>you 
>>
>>>going to present them to a user in terms of modeling constructs?
> 
> E.g.,
> 
>>>are you going to view each namespace as an "ontology"? Are there 
>>>operations you are planning on supporting over namespaces (like get
>>
>>all 
>>
>>>concepts from a namespace)?
>>>
>>>
>>>Shawn
>>>
>>>
>>>Serguei Krivov wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi All,
>>>>
>>>>We are getting close to graphic editing support for main owl 
>>>>constructs- this was a difficult part. Now we can also think about 
>>>>easy things like icons for editing toolbox and  editing metadata
> 
> for 
> 
>>>>ontologies.  The later point however brings certain hard questions.
> 
> 
>>>>Metadata pane should contain comments, author information and 
>>>>namespaces-imported, default etc. If authors info and comments
> 
> could 
> 
>>>>easily go into one more side panel,  it may be not so easy with 
>>>>namespaces. There are at least 3 options:
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>#1 Put namespaces on side panels. Pros -easy to make, cons-
>>
>>namespaces 
>>
>>>>will be wrapped since they need long field
>>>>
>>>>#2 Put namespaces on popup dialog. Pros- easy to make, cons -not 
>>>>aesthetically appealing
>>>>
>>>>#3 Create tab panel. One tab contains present view , another
> 
> contains
> 
>>>>metadata view. Pros- aesthetically appealing, cons - perhaps may 
>>>>require more work.
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>Would you please vote or give your suggestions. Any better option
>>
>>(#4, 
>>
>>>>#5,.)
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>Serguei
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>seek-kr-sms mailing list
>>>seek-kr-sms at ecoinformatics.org
>>>http://www.ecoinformatics.org/mailman/listinfo/seek-kr-sms

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Jones                                     jones at nceas.ucsb.edu
http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/    Fax: 425-920-2439    Ph: 907-789-0496
National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS)
University of California Santa Barbara
Interested in ecological informatics? http://www.ecoinformatics.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------



More information about the Seek-kr-sms mailing list